MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2109963254 · doi:10.1111/bjso.12018

The effects of autonomous and controlled regulation of performance‐approach goals on well‐being: A process model

2012· article· en· W2109963254 on OpenAlexaff
Nicolas Gillet, Marc‐André K. Lafrenière, Robert J. Vallerand, Isabelle Huart, Evelyne Fouquereau

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Social Psychology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMotivation and Self-Concept in Sports
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyConcordanceSocial psychologyProcess (computing)Structural equation modelingTest (biology)Well-beingGoal orientationApplied psychologyComputer sciencePsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The main purpose of the present research was to propose and test a motivational model linking achievement goal approach and self-determination theory. First, the effects of performance-approach goals and the autonomous and controlling reasons underlying their pursuit on well-being were investigated. Second, the mediating variables (i.e., effort, goal attainment, need satisfaction, and thwarting) at play in these relationships were examined based on the self-concordance model (Sheldon & Elliot, 1999). The model was tested in two studies in educational and work settings using cross sectional (Study 1) and prospective designs (Study 2). The present results revealed that considering autonomous and controlled regulations underlying performance-approach goals predicted well-being above and beyond the strength of performance-approach goals. Moreover, the mediational sequence based on the self-concordance model was supported in both studies. Theoretical implications and directions for future research are discussed.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.815
Threshold uncertainty score0.399

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.294 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations82
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of Social PsychologySame topicMotivation and Self-Concept in SportsFrench-language works237,207